At what point can a Congressperson break oath of secrecy?

[kentuck]

Does an oath of secrecy constrain a Congressman or Senator from reporting illegal activities or even murder? What's to keep these Congresspeople from anonymously leaking the information to the press if he is "uncomfortable" about breaking his oath of secrecy? Or does the oath of secrecy override all other concerns? Should we expect our Congresspeople to exhibit a small degree of independent thought whenever laws are broken in our names? Or is this the best we can expect?
=====================================

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/07/what-the-democrats-knew-and-when-they-knew-it/index.html?ref=opinion

<snip>

Writing at Balkinization, the group legal blog, Georgetown law professor Marty Lederman criticizes two Democrats in Congress who knew about the C.I.A.’s destruction of interrogation videotapes. “Jay Rockefeller claims that the Intel Committees were not ‘consulted’ on the use of the tapes ‘nor the decision to destroy the tapes.’ But he does not deny that he was informed of the agency’s intent to dispose of the tapes, and he acknowledges that he learned of the destruction one year ago, in November 2006,” Lederman writes. He continues:

And this is the first time he has said anything about it. Jay Rockefeller is constantly learning of legally dubious (at best) C.I.A. intelligence activities, and then saying nothing about them publicly until they are leaked to the press, at which point he expresses outrage and incredulity — but reveals nothing. Really, isn’t it about time the Democrats select an effective Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, one who will treat this scandal with the seriousness it deserves, and who will shed much-needed light on the C.I.A. program of torture, cruel treatment and obstruction of evidence?

Lederman also writes that “Jane Harman also knew of the intention to destroy the tapes, and she at least ‘urged’ the C.I.A. in writing not to do it.” But he notes, “But when she found out the C.I.A. had destroyed the tapes, where was Harman’s press conference? Where were the congressional hearings?”
...more
======================

A reader of this blog responded:

Let me see if I have this right…
The Republicans in the White House concoct intelligence and lead us into this war under dubious circumstances.
The Republican-led CIA continues a campaign of lies regarding torture and their use of it, in cluding destroying the evidence.
The NY Times is most concerned with 2 Democrats who knew about the tapes.
OK. Now I see.
This is all Bill Clinton’s fault, right?

— Posted by typical

[Bitwit1234]

1. I am pretty sure that they said they could be prosecuted

by the federal government and get jail time. Because they are breaking an oath of national security. Remember some time ago when Rockefeller said something about he couldn't tell about something, because he would be arrested.

[terisan]

6. I believe you are right. and we have no heroic Americans among Dems who knew. nt

[leveymg]

2. The worst that can happen is a Congressman loses his/her security clearance.

Members of Congress enjoy almost total legal immunity for official acts, and can't be prosecuted for unauthorized release of classified information, as can agency employees.

There's no excuse for the complicity with illegal acts shown by Rockefeller and Harmon. They should be replaced on the Committee, and new laws passed requiring open release of all information pertaining to illegal government activities. No more hiding crimes of state behind the wall of secrecy.

[kentuck]

3. Where have you gone, Frank Church?

Maybe it's time for another Church Committee?

[leveymg]

4. That would make a great title for a song, or an essay!

Mind if I borrow it?

[kentuck]

5. It doesn't have the zing of Joe DiMaggio...

But go ahead. :-)